It's no secret that Dembski and O'Leary are co-authoring a book on the evils of 'Christian Darwinism'. It will be fun to watch Dembski further marginalise himself from respectable academia but I wonder if they've thought out the broader implications.

The tack I assume they are going to take is that the idea that humans arose naturally and contingently is incompatible with God's fall/salvation/redemption project that Christianity espouses.

However, if Christianity in their eyes demands the appearance of humans as a deliberate act of crea....design, then so too must the Earth. For surely God is not going to leave his Great Plan at the mercy of natural law; hoping to himself that just the right kind of planet forms? No, just like humanity the Earth must have also been a special creation.

So it follows that Dembski and O'Leary are not only explicitly opposing common ancestry, but also the current and increasingly well supported nebula hypotheses of solar and planetary formation!

If you can't be a Christian and believe in a natural origin to humankind then you sure as hell can't be a Christian and hold to a naturalistic and contingent account of one of the necessary conditions of our existence - i.e. the Earth.

Thus, according to Dembski and O'Leary creationism is the only valid stance for a 'true' Christian.

So it follows that Dembski and O'Leary are not only explicitly opposing common ancestry, but also the current and increasingly well supported nebula hypotheses of solar and planetary formation!

And if the nebula hypotheses of solar and planetary formation is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!

--------------Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.